In an era of careful strategic planning and long-range global vision, most
Lebanese were shocked by Bkerki’s reaction, which transpired in the archbishops’
declaration and its sequels, vis-à-vis the elections in Lebanon.

Bkerki’s religious authority and teaching have always commanded a faithful
following among many Lebanese and an envious respect from all of them even its
foes; thus, many would have preferred for Cardinal Sfeir and the archbishops to
have stayed above the fray of petty electoral politics in Lebanon, preserving to
Bkerki the image it has, as a haven of safety, wisdom, and calm in times of
national crisis. But when Bkerki decided to intervene, for unknown reasons, many
would have expected from Bkerki more than just an arbitrary sectarian reaction
to protect the narrow interests of a few recycled and failed Christian leaders,
but rather a national carefully-planned proposal, to bring forth to the national
scene, a new breed of visionary leadership with progressive programs.

Unfortunately this is not what happened. Bkerki’s revolt was in line with the
regressive plans of the warlords, the feudal lords and some deep pockets, to
secure power in the hands of a few families (individuals or groups) who have
taken over Lebanese politics, Godfather style, through emotionally charged
rhetoric, void of any vision or constructive programs for the future. Today, the
sole outcome of Bkerki’s revolt may be a seat for a “favorite” daughter in
Beirut and a few other seats for some of the failed Maronite political families
in the rest of Lebanon. May God rest the soul of Rafic Hariri and Basem Fleihan,
and bless Ghattas Khoury and the other living “martyrs of merit” in Lebanon.

Most Lebanese mourned with tears Rafic Hariri, largely because he was a
successful man of humble origins, who made a positive change in the lives of his
family, his people and his nation. He gave hope and set an example for ordinary
Lebanese, that working hard with dedication can sometimes pay back in a country
dominated by tribalism, feudalism, warlords and regressive mentalities. However,
very few Lebanese expected Hariri’s shoes to be filled in a ritualistic crowning
ceremony that goes against everything Hariri stood for. This is not to belittle
or deny the right of Hariri’s biological heir Saadeddine to a role in Lebanese
politics, but Saad’s program so far seems to be a few photo-ops around the
world, his father’s legacy... and a vague notion of national unity. With a
collection of candidates on his list from every walk of the political life in
Lebanon, one is left to wonder what his program is vis-à-vis socio-economic
reforms or the looming implementation of UNSC 1559.

Most Lebanese also celebrated Jumblatt’s apparent political re-birth and many
hailed it as the return of the prodigal son, especially after he denounced, for
the first time in his public political life, Syrian tutelage, and called for
secular reforms in Lebanon and invited young new ideas to continue the
rebuilding process. But sadly, that only happened amidst Jumblatt’s frequent
hops to Europe and the West where he was reminded of Descartes’ “I think
therefore I am”. Now that he has settled in Mount Lebanon, it seems that the
Lebanese air poisoned with feudalism and tribalism has got back to him and
suppressed the democrat in him, only to revive “Abu Zeid el-Helali”.

And yes many Lebanese celebrated “Kornet Shehwan” as a professional group
born of the plight of the Lebanese citizens under Syrian occupation, and looked
upon it with hope to what its plan was going to be. At the end of the day, the
Kornet had no national program, let alone a sectarian one, and many of its
members came across driven by narrow personal interests and an arriviste
mentality, proving once again to the World that selfishness in Lebanon is a
virtue, and lending truth to the old Arabic adage: “Kil Min Ido Elo”.

The “Amal Movement” was celebrated, at one point or another in the history of
the Lebanese conflict, as a national alternative to the regressive feudalism
that dominates Lebanon. But after more than 15 years as the executor of the
“Syrian Will” in Lebanon, the Amal Movement today continues to impose on the
nation a failed leadership who has done very little, not to say nothing, to
expand the movement of hope to all the dispossessed within its sectarian reach
let alone beyond it, or to promote a non-confessional national agenda or to
consolidate national unity… or at the least to initiate a rebuilding campaign of
Southern Lebanon, free from Israeli occupation since the year 2000 AD.

The Lebanese Forces as a progressive power of change in Lebanon died in 1982
with the assassination of its founder, the late Bachir Gemayyel. What is left
today is a fundamentalist group of zealots driven by adulation of an imprisoned
warlord and an alleged assassin, claiming to represent Christian values and
defend the interests of the Christian community. Whether this movement will be
able to regroup after the release of its leader from prison and evolve into a
democratic organization with a truly national program that transcends narrow
sectarian goals, remains to be determined.

Despite reservations on its origins, identity, agenda and modus operandi,
Hezbollah seems today to be one of the few brokers in Lebanese politics, and
perhaps the only organization in Lebanon, with a clear agenda. Working to
advance the cause of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon, it has achieved many of
its goals largely by capitalizing on the political and leadership vacuum on the
national scene and exploiting the fears of many Lebanese and their resentment
towards the state of Israel. Hezbollah fits perfectly within the sectarian
establishment of Lebanon and seems to benefit from it. It remains to be seen
whether this symbiotic relationship will endure or whether Hezbollah can
transcend its sectarian agenda to offer a positive national vision; unless its
leadership is content within its niche and plans to wiggle its way into
Lebanon’s feudal establishment.

Last but not least, many Lebanese welcomed General Michel Aoun back in
Lebanon with open arms and big hopes. The “General”, as usual, spoke from the
heart with mighty words and great ideas; but alas, without a concrete plan to
implement those ideas. The time may have been short (or shortened, by design or
lack thereof) between the return of the “General” from exile and the spring
elections, for him to organize a slate of candidates and offer the Lebanese
people a comprehensive program that embodies his vision. The Lebanese people,
who can freely read and think, know that; but their patience has its limits.
They are waiting to find out if the Free Patriotic Movement of the General has
the necessary components and can acquire the requisite momentum to become a
national reform movement. Will it pull itself together and fill the political
vacuum in Lebanon with a forward-looking and democratic agenda? Or will it
wither and die into the jungle of sectarian divisions and the opium of
individual idolatry?

The politics of “business as usual” and back-door deals between the few power
holders on the Lebanese scene seem to have prevailed and dealt democracy in
Lebanon a big blow one more time, this time without the excuse of foreign
intervention. These politics have historically and by all means (including
warfare), marginalized the aspirations of the new generations, silenced the
honest voices of revolt against corruption, empowered the sectarian regime and
secured the entitlements of a privileged few and their blood-lines in the
political establishment.

“Democracy by agreement”, they like to call it! It is a fancy, user-friendly
misnomer to describe the “coalition of tribal lords”.

What is the point of holding an election today if the system is wired to
leave out new and young ideas and keep the same corrupt tribal geezers and
warlords of the past, give them a facelift and makeup, and bring-in with them a
few new faces loyal to their interests?

It is time to pause and ask what do we want from our politicians and what do
we need elections for?

The bickering over the election law today is not really over the rights of
the different religious communities (that was the façade) but over the
entitlements of the feudal lords and the warlords who take for granted their
rights to decide for these communities. It is time to change the status-quo,
rewrite the laws and bring about a clean slate of secular politicians, faithful
to their country and driven by the ideal to serve their nation and the zeal to
excel in their service.

The alternative would be to amend the Lebanese Constitution to formally adopt
a federate or confederate system of government that preserves the specificities
and independent rights of the different religious communities and allows each
community the privacy to make internal reforms, the seclusion to forge its way
in the modern age of democracy and the right to chose its representatives and
leaders independently of other communities, democratically or as it sees fit.

…so that the sacrifices of 30 years of war and occupation do not go in vain;
unless the land of Lebanon is doomed, by “Creative Design” or pure geographic
location, to be in eternal conflict, to continuously export great minds into the
World and endlessly retain gigantic mediocrities at home, recycle them into a
few politicians who imprison its inhabitants in the dark ages.